The current system seems to have, in my honest opinion, some deficits.
1. The time between each quest is too short. Right now a quest is a chore and not a joy. When they hit you like machine gun fire, you know they occur too frequently. Perhaps that is fine with some, but to me it is unneccessary noise that makes them more a nuisance than a bonus. I fear the users will ignore quests should this continue. This pertains in particular to the mature part of our crowd.
2. The quest planning could also need some more time. To create compelling quests, I believe it is prudent that we plan well and long, to truly come up with something exciting and genuine. The present two week deadline in which only neglected subjects and old, recycled ideas are accepted seem poor to me. Personally I have a career, but I would still like to have a say in the quest planning. Currently that would be difficult, as the timeline per se fits students and unemployed, and not those of us with demanding jobs.
3. There is still not any general agreement concerning the finalists. I consider the 4.5 limit preposterous and the arguments, though articulate and sincere, have not persuaded me of anything. I truly believe that a hall of honour says more than a high vote. A high vote is an indication of quality, but not bullet proof evidence of superiority. You all know that posts are evaluated differently, and one 4.6 might easily be poorer than a 4.3. An indication of this would be the 4.6 had no HoH's, while the 4.3 might be flooded with HoH's. Therefore I say that to neglect goldens and halls of honour is a great injustice and insult to that submission. High votes are too closely tied to herd voting, tactical voting and the audience in general to be the lone determining factor of quality.